1901.] A NEW HEDGEHOG. 289 



Erinaceus auritus juv. '?, Dobson, Monogr. Insectivora, i. p. 16 

 (1888). 



Of late there has prevailed a very false idea about this species, 

 which has been forgotten for full half a century. This is probably 

 due to the fact that Brandt described an apparently young specimen, 

 and that the description of the full-grown animal, given by 

 Eversmann, and the more detailed one of Brandt, were written in 

 Bussian and were published in works that have long ago become 

 bibliographical rarities. That is the reason why I find it necessary 

 to dwell at some length on this species. 



It was evident, from the study of the existing literature, that 

 Dobson's opinion as to E. hypomelas being the young E. auritus 

 could not stand, as the young Hedgehogs of the last-named species 

 are much lighter-coloured than are the old ones, and they are 

 nearly white on the under surface of the body. I was myself dis- 

 posed to think that E. hypomelas might prove to be the young of 

 E. macracanthus. 



In the summer of 1900 I had the opportunity of examining 

 Eversmann's specimens in the Zoological Museum of the Kazan 

 University, which had served him as types for his description. 

 These were two well-preserved stuffed specimens, one of them 

 having a nearly perfect skull, which I had the good luck to ex- 

 tricate entire. 



This skull differed from the skulls in my possession of 

 E. macracanthus only by its greater length (61 mm.) ; and I think 

 that it would be difficult to distinguish the two species by the 

 skulls alone. 



The bare space on the head is as well-defined as it is in E. ma- 

 cracanthus. In his article, P. Z. 8. 1895, Anderson says (footnote 

 on p. 421) that Biichner, the then curator of the Mammalian 

 Department of the Zool. Museum of the St. Petersburg Academy 

 of Sciences, told him that the type which had served for Brandt's 

 description had no bare space on the head and that the sphies were 

 disposed as in E. auritus. Now I think that there must have 

 been a mistake about this point, and that it is sometimes quite 

 impossible to see this character in stuffed specimens and espe- 

 cially in such a very old one (dating from 1838) as Brandt's type 

 specimen, which was the skin of a very young animal l . In both 

 the adult specimens of the Kazan Museum this bare space is well 

 marked. That both Brandt and Eversmann have described the 

 same species was made clear to me by the following circumstance : 

 on the drawing made from the St. Petersburg specimen (Simashko, 

 pi. \i.) of E. hypomelas, as well as on the stuffed specimens of the 

 Kazan Museum, there is a very noticeable character which neither 

 Brandt nor Eversmann has mentioned, — namely, in E. hypo- 

 melas the whole head up to the hind part of the crown is quite 



\t m\ request, Prof. N. Kaatcbenko baa obligingly examined this 8] [men, 



and baa found on the head a bare area of which he baa lent me a drawing. 

 This leaves do doubt bj to the bare apace oo the bead of E. hyponuku having 

 exaotrj the same appearance aa ii baa in E, maoraoanthus. 



pioc ZOOI. .Srji:.— 190X, Vol. Jl. .No. XIX. 19 



